News

Discussion paper on un authorised photography

The Comrade has put out a media release calling for final submissions to a discussion paper entitled “Unauthorised Photographs on the Internet And Ancillary Privacy Issues”. The paper makes an interesting read in itself and is available from the home page of the Justice and Community Safety Webpage.

Although the discussion paper content is serious… I wonder how many people would actually be considering taking unauthorised photographs of the Chief Minister (or any of the other local politicians as public figures) in order to derive sexual gratification?

Somebody help me here… I remember reading somewhere (probably a long time ago now and probably more applicable to the US) that you did not need consent to take a photo (film) if there were more than 5 people in the photo and it was in a public place.

That probably explains why you can get group shots with “stock footage” during the news, of people walking, or doing things (showing faces in a group type situation) when they talk about a generic issue such as smoking or obesity etc – which is different to an issue such as a protest where there is actual shots of those participating.

I’m sure the trial by fire will be the next time Canberra hosts a fun run, and Dopey Stan can stand out front with a permission form and a pen for everybody’s authority to use their photographic image for such things as the CT, posting pictures on the CT internet website, on all the what’s happening in Canberra sites, heck JB might even get out there with his camera. (no pressure, just a suggestion)…

Impractical hardly begins to encompass how hard it will be to enforce this.

This whole thing sounds to me like code for “I don’t want people taking photos of me that could be used to make me look like a dick and cost me votes”. It’s got nothing to do with security and/or privacy. That seems to be the flavour of the month excuse to pass draconian legislation at the moment.

If you’re a public figure and someone takes a photo of you as you go about your job, the copyright surely remains with the photographer, doesn’t it?

If you are in a public area you have no “right” to privacy from other people taking photos of the same area.

As for the lesbian street theatre performer – what the hell was she doing in acting in a lesbian street theatre if she was worried she might get recognised as a follower of Sappho?

Obtaining consent is totally impractical as well – how could you photograph a football game if you had to get consent from every member of the crowd who happened to be in the background?

The issue of the inappropriate use of photos on the net is a separate one. There are already laws against the salacious posting of child pictures. Enforcement may be difficult, but it’s no reason to impose draconian restrictions on everyone.